[comp.sys.amiga] comparing SCSI controllers

drz@csri.toronto.edu (Jerry Zarycky) (11/27/88)

I've just read the latest Amazing Computing, which fortunately had
an in-depth article comparing various SCSI controllers.
As advertised (in general) the DMA controllers were the fastest, except
when the machine got tied up doing heavy graphics and sound (using up
most of the available DMA slots) and small buffers were used.
In general, the Supra and 2090A controllers were of equivalent
speed (except for one strange case in DPaint 2, I believe), where the
2090A controllers slowed down almost an order of magnitude, while the
Supra showed no apparent slowdown.
I take it this is a problem with the hdisk software?
Any comments from the knowledgeable at CATS?  DaveH?


Jerry Zarycky

Usenet:	{uunet,watmath}!csri.toronto.edu!drz
CSNET:	drz@csri.toronto.edu         EAN:   drz@csri.toronto.cdn
BITNET:	drz@csri.utoronto

drz%csri.toronto.edu%CERNVAX.BITNET@cunyvm.cuny.edu (11/29/88)

I've just read the latest Amazing Computing, which fortunately had
an in-depth article comparing various SCSI controllers.
As advertised (in general) the DMA controllers were the fastest, except
when the machine got tied up doing heavy graphics and sound (using up
most of the available DMA slots) and small buffers were used.
In general, the Supra and 2090A controllers were of equivalent
speed (except for one strange case in DPaint 2, I believe), where the
2090A controllers slowed down almost an order of magnitude, while the
Supra showed no apparent slowdown.
I take it this is a problem with the hdisk software?
Any comments from the knowledgeable at CATS?  DaveH?


Jerry Zarycky

Usenet:    {uunet,watmath}!csri.toronto.edu!drz
CSNET:    drz@csri.toronto.edu         EAN:   drz@csri.toronto.cdn
BITNET:    drz@csri.utoronto